Issue - meetings

Report by the Director for Planning & Place (PN6).

This is an application for an aggregate bagging plant adjacent to the rail sidings at Appleford. The site lies within the Sutton Courtenay minerals and waste complex and sand and gravel would be imported by internal haul road from the applicant’s processing plant. Material would also be imported by rail through the sidings and, in smaller quantities, by road. The application site previously contained a pulverised fuel ash classification building, which has recently been removed leaving a vacant site with an area of hard standing.

The site is located some distance from residential properties and it is not considered that there would be any significant amenity impacts. It would replace a higher building and is not considered to have a significant landscape impact. Traffic would be subject to a routeing agreement to ensure that the A4130 was used rather than roads through local villages. The development is in accordance with policies encouraging sustainability.

The application is being reported to committee following an objection by  Sutton Courtenay Parish Council. There have been no other objections.

It is RECOMMENDED that subject to a routeing agreement to ensure that all HGVs associated with the development use the access onto the A4130planning permission that application MW.0054/17 be approved subject to conditions as set out in Annex 1 to the report PN6.

Approved

The Committee considered (PN6) an application for an aggregate bagging plant adjacent to the rail sidings at Appleford and within the Sutton Courtenay minerals and waste complex.

Councillor Fox-Davies expressed some concern regarding the number of planning applications that came in for this complex and the potential for planning creep.

Mr Periam advised that account could be taken of other permissions/developments if affected but ultimately the application needed to be considered on its merits. The Sutton Courtenay complex had a permitted industrial use and this particular development would share the same access route in and out as other development and be subject to the same routeing agreement.

Responding to Councillor Gawrysiak he confirmed that as far as he was aware vehicles generally complied with the agreement and there seemed to be little reason for them to do otherwise unless it was a local delivery. In the 4 years he had been working at this authority he was not aware of any major breaches to the agreement.

Responding to Councillor Roberts Mary Thompson confirmed there had been some concerns expressed regarding additional levels of traffic on the planned route.

Councillor Johnston pointed out that in the event that the line from Didcot was electrified at 25KV and the sidings likewise then this introduced new safety considerations for the latter which would be particularly true if material was being delivered to the sidings in box wagons, which had to be unloaded from above using mechanical grabs.  This could not take place under hanging cables for safety reasons and even though proposals for electrification of the Didcot – Oxford length of line had been shelvedthat needed to be borne in mind if material was being delivered by rail post electrification.

Recognising the points made regarding safety issues and planning creep Councillor Stratford moved that the officer recommendation be approved. The motion seconded by Councillor Reynolds as put to the Committee and -

RESOLVED: (unanimously) that subject to a routeing agreement to ensure that all HGVs associated with the development used the access onto the A4130 that application MW.0054/17 be approved subject to conditions as set out in Annex 1 to the report PN6.